2. Costs in proceedings before the Registrar : reduction to reflect unsatisfactory evidence.

Summary

The opposition was based on a number of MOTOROLA and M device registrations.

The Hearing Officer first reviewed the opponents' evidence. He concluded that this lacked specificity and detail and did "not even address itself to the goods of the registrations" on which the opponents relied.

He therefore dismissed any claims based on an alleged reputation and hence he dismissed the Section 5(3) ground. His dissatisfaction with the evidence was reflected in his award of costs.

Under Section 5(2)(b), however, and basing his assessment on just one of the registrations cited he found identical goods and similar marks. Overall, he found a likelihood of confusion and the opposition succeeded accordingly.

His award of costs however excluded any element in respect of the opponents’ evidence as this had been unsatisfactory.